English Chess Forum

I'm grateful to a colleague on the Atticus forum for pointing this out.

Bookies, Paddy Power, make Kramnik 10/1 to win tomorrow's game with White. I don't know what's going on in Bonn, even less in Kramnik's head of course. But 10/1 seems a likely bet. You can also get 4/11 the draw, the probable outcome I guess if Kramnik has given up the title. Certainly the bookies say it's all over: Paddy Power offers Anand at 1/100 to take the crown, effectively paying out on Anand at half-time

http://www.paddypower.com/bet?action=go ... bir_index=

David
Atticus CC

(Title modified in light of further information)

Those do sound like good odds.

Unfortunately as my personal financial situation consists of €40 in a Spanish bank account and a rather larger deficit in my sterling position, I am in the position of recommending a bet which I'm not actually prepared to make.

I reckon that would be worth twenty quid of my money if I had any.

David Robertson wrote:Bookies, Paddy Power, make Kramnik 10/1 to win tomorrow's game with White.

It will be difficult to do that - Kramnik actually has Black in Game 7, since the colour sequence reverses at the halfway mark (Regulation 3.4.1). I think it's to ensure that the players aren't always in the same situation on the rest days. The same regulation applied in the Kramnik-Topalov match.

Ah yes. How embarrassing.

That said, 10/1 still not a bad bet.

Apologies for the white/black confusion, as I was the original poster over at the Atticus forum,


I took my information regarding colours from Chessbase,
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4970

memo to self: assume nothing

Yes, Chessbase. Same here.; I did check before posting. If one can't trust Chessbase to get it right, what hope is there. I might not have been so startled by the odds if I'd realised Kramnik was Black

David

Pah! So you trust ChessBase before BCM... where we have the colour sequencing right. Or indeed ChessVibes, where Pete Doggers also has it right. Well, at least it helps dispel the stereotype that the Germans are more efficient than the rest of us.

Let's hope that the players are not using ChessBase as their guide to colours. Just imagine how embarrassing it would be for Big Vlad to sit down in front of the white pieces tomorrow only to be told that he was on the wrong side of the board.

John Saunders wrote:at least it helps dispel the stereotype that the Germans are more efficient than the rest of us

C'est si Bonn

David

May be I am a quixotic middle-aged dreamer, and I know I am only a 170 woodpusher these days, but it would be nice to see Kramnik going for broke with Black from here on and playing something not totally unsound, but viewed with suspicion at the highest level (e.g. Clarendon Court, Benko, Albin Countergambit, Schliemann depending on whether Anand plays 1 d4 or 1 e4). Not Kramnik's style, I know, but he could hardly be doing worse than he has done to date, and at least he might make Anand think and have a proper fight in an unbalanced position which Anand is unlikely to have studied on his computer beforehand. Unfortunately, for professionals, ELO points are everything, so he may engage in damage limitation, which would be a pity. Hats off to Anand, though - he has been very impressive so far.

So £11.00 earned you £4.00 (less tax), and it's 5-2 to Anand.

No one since Steinitz has come back from three down to win the crown.

David

You dont get "less tax" on gambling

Ben

David Robertson wrote

No one since Steinitz has come back from three down to win the crown.

I believe that Max Euwe came back to win after being three down on two occasions (after game 7 and game 9) in his 1935 match against Alekhine. However, he had rather more remaining games at his disposal to do so.

Anyway, will anybody confess to having taken the bet?

What do I know? Lest anyone think I'm an authority on the matter, this is my source:

TWIC (Malcolm Pein) wrote:You have to go a long way back in chess history to find a successful recovery from three games down in a world title match. In the first recognized contest in 1886 Wilhelm Steinitz came back from 1-4 to defeat Johannes Zukertort. That illustrates the scale of the task facing Vladimir Kramnik

http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/event/wch08/gm6.html

But then I find this:

BCM (John Saunders) wrote:By the end he looked like a beaten man. Kramnik, now on minus 3, will have to emulate Steinitz (who was 1-4 down against Zukertort in the very first world title match in 1886) if he is to regain his title (Leonard Barden reminds me that Euwe was also three down to Alekhine in 1935 and came back to win)

Ben Purton wrote:You dont get "less tax" on gambling

Crikey! You don't! How did that slip by? Just shows how long since I've punted via the bookies - on- or off-line. But I presume miserable odds now reflect the in-built tax the bookies pay.

David